tions,) what they called the internal juice and ||ters and writings of Albert the Great, and marrow of the Scriptures, i. e. their hidden and Thomas Aquinas, will know every thing that mysterious sense; and this they did with so lit- is worthy of note in the rest, who were no tle dexterity, so little plausibility and inven- more than their echoes. The latter of these tion, that the greater part of their explications || truly great men, commonly called the Angel must appear insipid and nauseous to such as of the Schools, or the Angelic Doctor, sat unare not entirely destitute of judgment and taste. rivalled at the head of the divines of this cenIf our readers be desirous of a proof of the tury, and deservedly obtained the principal justice of this censure, or curious to try the place among those who digested the doctrines extent of their patience, they have only to pe- of Christianity into a regular system, and ilruse the explications that have been given by lustrated and explained them in a scientific Archbishop Langton, Hugh de St. Cher, and manner. For no sooner had his system, or Antony of Padua, of the various books of the sum of theology and morals, seen the light, Old and New Testament. The mystic doctors than it was received almost universally with carried this visionary method of interpreting the highest applause, placed in the same rank Scripture to the greatest height, and displayed with Lombard's famous Book of Sentences, the most laborious industry, or rather the and admitted as the standard of truth, and the most egregious folly, in searching for myste- great rule according to which the public teachries, where reason and common sense could ers formed their plans of instruction, and the find nothing but plain and evident truths. youth their methods of study. Some writers, They were too penetrating and quick-sighted not indeed, have denied that Thomas was the auto perceive clearly in the holy scriptures all thor of the celebrated system that bears his those doctrines that were agreeable to their name;* but the reasons which they allege in idle and fantastic system. Nor were their ad- support of this notion are destitute of evidence versaries, the schoolmen, entirely averse to this and solidity.† arbitrary and fanciful manner of interpreta- VI. The greatest part of these doctors fol tion, though their principal industry was em-lowed Aristotle as their model, and made use ployed rather in collecting the explications gi- || of the logical and metaphysical principles of ven by the ancient doctors, than in inventing new ones, as appears from the writings of Alexander Hales, William Alvernus, and Thomas Aquinas himself. We must not, however, omit observing, that the scholastic doctors in general, and more especially these now mentioned, had recourse often to the subtleties of logic and metaphysics, to assist them in their explications of the sacred writings. To facilitate the study and interpretation of these divine books, Hugh de St. Cher composed his Concordance, and the Dominicans, under the eye of their supreme chief, the learned Jordan, gave a new edition of the Latin translation of the Bible, carefully revised and corrected from the ancient copies.† The Greeks contributed nothing that deserves attention toward the illustration of the Scriptures; the greatest part of which were expounded with great learning by Gregory Abulpharaj, that celebrated Syrian, whose erudition was famous throughout the east, and whom we have already had occasion to mention.f V. Systems of theology and ethics were multiplied exceedingly in this century; and of those writers, who treated of the divine perfections and worship and of the practical rules of virtue and obedience, the number is too great to permit specification. All such as were endowed with any considerable degree of genius and cloquence, employed their labours upon these noble branches of sacred science, more especially the academical and public teachers, among whom the Dominicans and Franciscans held the most eminent rank. It is, Indeed, unnecessary to mention the names, or enumerate the productions of these doctors, since whoever is acquainted with the charac * Echardi Scriptor. Ord. Prædicator. tom. i. p. 194. † Rich. Simon, Crit. de la Bib. des Aut. Ecc. par M. Du-Pin, t. i. p. 341. Jos. Sim. Assemani Biblioth. Orient. Vatican, tom li p 177 that subtle philosopher, in illustrating the doctrines of Christianity, and removing the difficulties with which some of them were attended. In their philosophical explications of the more sublime truths of that divine religion, they followed the hypothesis of the Realists, which sect, in this century, was much more numerous and flourishing than that of the Nominalists, on account of the lustre and credit it derived from the authority of Thomas Aquinas and Albert, its learned and venerable patrons. Yet, notwithstanding all the subtlety and penetration of these irrefragable, seraphic, and angelic doctors, as they were usually styled, they often appeared wiser in their own conceit, than they were in reality, and frequently did little more than involve in greater obscurity the doctrines which they pretended to place in the clearest light. For, not to mention the ridiculous oddity of many of their expressions, the hideous barbarity of their style, and their extravagant and presumptuous desire of prying into matters that infinitely surpass the comprehension of short-sighted mortals, they were chargeable with defects in their manner of reasoning, which every true philosopher will, of all others, be most careful to avoid. For they neither defined their terms accurately, (and hence arose innumerable disputes merely about words,) nor did they divide their subjects with perspicuity and precision; and hence they generally treated it in a confused and unsatisfactory manner. The great Angelic Doctor * See Jo. Launoii Traditio Ecclesæ circa Simoni. am, p. 290. † See Natalis Alexander, Histor. Eccles. Sæc. xii p. 391.-Echard and Quetif, Scriptor. Ordin. Prædicator. Sæc. xiii. tom. i. p. 293.—Ant. Touron, Vie de St. Thomas, p. 604. In the original we find Positivi in the margin, which is manifestly a fault; since the Positivi were quite opposite, in their method of teaching, to the schoolmen, and were the same with the Biblici men. tioned in the following section. See above Cent xii. Part ii. Ch. iii. sect. viii. himself, notwithstanding his boasted method, || Franciscan friars; and, as the monks of these was defective in these respects; his definitions are often vague, or obscure, and his plans or divisions, though full of art, are frequently destitute of clearness and proportion. orders had no possessions, not even libraries, and led, besides, wandering and itinerant lives, such of them as were ambitious of literary fame, and of the honours of authorship, were, for the most part, obliged to draw their materials from their own genius and memory, being destitute of all other succours. VII. The method of investigating divine truth by reason and philosophy remarkably prevailed, and was followed with such ardour, that the number of those who, in conformity VIII. The opinions which these philosophi with the example of the ancient doctors, drew cal divines instilled into the minds of the youth, their systems of theology from the holy scrip-appeared to the votaries of the ancient fathers tures and the writings of the fathers, and who highly dangerous and even pernicious; and acquired on that account the name of Biblicists, hence they used their utmost efforts to stop diminished from day to day. It is true, indeed, the progress of these opinions, and to diminish that several persons of eminent piety, and the credit and influence of their authors. Nor even some of the Roman pontiffs, exhorted was their opposition at all ill-grounded; for the with great seriousness and warmth the scho- subtle doctors of the school not only explained lastic divines, and more especially those of the the mysteries of religion in a manner conforuniversity of Paris, to change their method of able to the principles of their presumptuous teaching theology, and (relinquishing their logic, and modified them according to the dicphilosophical abstraction and subtlety) to de- tates of their imperfect reason, but also produce the sublime science of salvation from the moted the most impious sentiments and tenets holy scriptures with that purity and simplicity concerning the Supreme Being, the material with which it was delivered by the inspired world, the origin of the universe, and the nawriters. But these admonitions and exhorta- ture of the soul. And when it was objected tions were without effect; the evil was too in- to these sentiments and tenets, that they were veterate to admit a speedy remedy, and the in direct contradiction to the genius of Christipassion for logic and metaphysics had become anity, and to the express doctrines of Scripso general and so violent, that neither remonture, these scholastic quibblers had recourse, strances nor arguments could check its pre- for a reply, or rather for a method of escape, sumption or allay its ardour. In justice how-to that perfidious distinction which has been ever to the scholastic doctors, it is necessary to observe, that they did not neglect the dictates of the Gospel or the authority of tradition, though it is sufficiently proved, by what they drew from these two sources, that they had studied neither with much attention or application of mind.§ And it is moreover certain, that, in process of time, they committed to others the care of consulting the sources now mentioned, and reserved to themselves the much-respected province of philosophy, and the intricate mazes of dialectical chicane. And, indeed, independent of their philosophical vanity, we may assign another reason for this method of proceeding, drawn from the nature of their profession, and the circumstances in which they were placed. For the greatest part of these subtle doctors were Dominican or frequently employed by modern deists,—that these tenets were philosophically true, and conformable to right reason, but that they were, indeed, theologically false, and contrary to the orthodox faith. This produced an open war between the Biblicists and the scholastic doctors; which was carried on with great warmth throughout the whole course of this century, particularly in the universities of Oxford and Paris, where we find the former loading the latter with the heaviest reproaches in their public acts and in their polemic writings, and accusing them of corrupting the doctrines of the Gospel, both in their public lessons, and in their private discourse.* Even St. Thomas himself was accused of holding opinions contrary to the truth; his orthodoxy, at least, was looked upon as extremely dubious by many of the Parisian doctors. He accordingly saw a formidable scene of opposition arising against him, but had the good fortune to ward off the storm, and to escape untouched. Others, whose authority was less extensive, and whose names were less respectable, were treated with greater severity. The living were obliged to confess publicly their errors; and the memories of the dead, who had persevered in them to the last, were branded with infamy. IX. But the most formidable adversaries the scholastic doctors had to encounter were the Mystics, who, rejecting every thing that bore the least resemblance to argumentation or dispute about matters of doctrine and opin *See Matth. Paris, Histor. Major, p. 541.-Boulay, Hist. Acad. Paris. tom. iii. p. 397, 430, &c. † See J. Launoy, Histor. Gymnas. Navarreni, part iii. lib. iii. chap. cxvi. tom. iv. op. part i. p. 485.Boulay, Histor. Acad. Paris. tom. iv. p. 204.-Petr Zorni Opuscula Sacra, tom. i. p. 445.--R. Simon Lettres Choisies, tom. ii. p. 266.-Echar li Scriptor Ordin. Prædicator. tom. i. p. 435. on, confined their endeavours to the advancement of inward piety, and the propagation of devout and tender feelings, and thus acquired the highest degree of popularity. The people, who are much more affected with what touches their passions, than with what is only addressed to their reason, were attached to the Mystics in the warmest manner; and this gave such weight to the reproaches and invectives which they threw out against the schoolmen, that the latter thought it more prudent to disarm these favourites of the multitude by mild and submissive measures, than to return their reproaches with indignation and bitterness. They accordingly set themselves to flatter the Mystics, and not only extolled their sentimental system, out employed their pens in illustrating and defending it; they even associated it with the scholastic philosophy, though they were as different from each other as any two things could be. It is well known that Bonaventura, Albert the Great, Robert Capito, and Thomas Aquinas, contributed to this reconciliation between mysticism and dialectics by their learned labours, and even went so far as to write commentaries upon Dionysius, the chief of the Mystics, whom these subtle doctors probably looked upon with a secret contempt. X. Both the schoolmen and Mystics of this century treated, in their writings, of the obligations of morality, the duties of the Christian life, and of the means that were most adapted to preserve or deliver the soul from the servitude and contagion of vice; but their methods of handling these important subjects were, as may be easily conceived, entirely different. We may form an idea of mystical morality from the observations of George Pachymeres, upon the writings of Dionysius, and from the Spiritual Institutes, or Abridgment of Mystic Theology, composed by Humbert de Romanis, of which productions the former was written in Greek, and the second in Latin. As to the scholastic moralists, they were principally employed in defining the nature of virtue and vice in general, and the characters of the various virtues and vices in particular; and hence a || prodigious number of sums, or systematic collections of virtues and vices, appeared in this century. The schoolmen divided the virtues into two classes. The first comprehended the moral virtues, which differ, in no respect, from those which Aristotle recommended to his disciples. The second contained the theological virtues, which, in consequence of what St. Paul says, (1 Corinth. xiii. 13,) they made to consist in faith, hope, and charity. In exploring and illustrating the nature of the virtues comprehended in these two classes, they scerned rather to have in view the pleasures of disputing, than the design of instructing; and they exhausted all their subtlety in resolving difficulties which were of their own creation. Thomas Aquinas shone forth as a star of the first magnitude, though, like the others, he was often covered with impenetrable fogs. The second part of his famous sum was wholly employed in laying down the principles of morality, and in deducing and illustrating the various duties that result from them; and this part of his earned labour has had the honour and misforVOL 1.-47 || tune of passing through the hands of a truly prodigious number of commentators. XI. It is absolutely necessary to observe here, that the moral writers of this and the following centuries must be read with the ut most caution, and with a perpetual attention to this circumstance, that, though they employ the same terms that we find in the sacred writings, yet they use them in a quite different sense from that which they really bear in these divine books. They speak of justice, charity, faith, and holiness; but, from the manner in which these virtues are illustrated by those quibbling sophists, they differ much from the amiable and sublime duties, which Christ and his disciples inculcated under the same denominations. A single example will be sufficient to render this evident beyond contradiction. A pious and holy man, according to the sense annexed by our Saviour to these terms, is one who consecrates his affections and actions to the service of the Supreme Being, and accounts it his highest honour and felicity, as well as his indispensable duty, to obey his laws. But, in the style of the moral writers of this age, that person was pious and holy, who deprived himself of his possessions to enrich the priesthood, to build churches, and found monasteries, and whose faith and obedience were so implicitly enslaved to the imperious dictates of the Roman pontiffs, that he believed and acted without examination, as these lordly directors thought proper to prescribe. Nor were the ideas which these writers entertained concerning justice, at all conformable to the nature of that virtue, as it is described in the holy scriptures, since in their opinion it was lawful to injure, revile, torment, persecute, and even put to death, a heretic, i. e. any person who refused to obey blindly the decrees of the pontiffs, or to believe all the absurdities which they imposed upon the credulity of the multi tude. XII. The writers of controversy in this cen tury were more numerous than respectable Nicetas Acominatus, who made a considerable figure among the Greeks, attacked all the different sects in his work entitled The Treasure of the Orthodox Faith; but he combated after the Grecian manner, and defended the cause which he had espoused, rather by the decrees of councils and the decisions of the fathers, than by the dictates of reason and the authority of Scripture. Raymond of Pennafort was one of the first among the Latins, who abandoned the unchristian method of converting infidels by the force of arms and the ter rors of capital punishments, and who undertook to vanquish the Jews and Saracens by reason and argument.* This engaged in the same controversy a considerable number of able disputants, who were acquainted with the Hebrew and Arabic languages; among whom Raymond Martini, the celebrated author of the Sword of Faith, is unquestionably entitled to the first rank. Thomas Aquinas also appeared with dignity among the Christian *Echard and Quetif apud Scriptores Ordinis Præ dicator. tom. 1. sect. xiii. † Bayle's Dictionary, at the article Martini. Pau Colomesi: Hispania Orient. p. 209 champions; and his book against the Gentiles* | not durable; for the situation of affairs in 18 far from being contemptible: nor ought we Greece and Italy being changed some years to omit mentioning a learned book of Alan de after this convention, in such a manner as to l'Isle, which was designed to refute the objec-deliver the former from all apprehensions of a tions both of Jews and Pagans. The writers, Latin invasion, Andronicus, the son of Mi who handled other (more particular) branches chael, assembled a council at Constantinople, of theological controversy, were far inferior in the palace of Blachernæ, A. D. 1284, in to those now mentioned in genius and abi- which, by a solemn decree, this ignominious lities; and their works seemed less calculated treaty was annulled, and the famous Veccus, to promote the truth, than to render their ad- by whose persuasion and authority it had been versaries odious. concluded, was sent into exile.* This resolute measure, as may well be imagined, rendered the divisions more violent than they had been before the treaty was signed; and it was also followed by an open schism, and by the most unhappy discords among the Grecian clergy. XIII. The grand controversy between the Greek and Latin church, was still carried on; and all the efforts that were made, during this century, to bring it to a conclusion, proved ineffectual. Gregory IX. employed the ministry of the Franciscan monks to bring about an accommodation with the Greeks, and pursued with zeal this laudable purpose from the year 1232, to the end of his pontificate, but without the least appearance of success. Innocent IV. embarked in the same undertaking, in 1247, and with that view sent John of Parma, with other Franciscan friars, to Nice; while the Grecian pontiff came in person to Rome, and was declared legate of the apostolic see.§ But these previous acts of mutual civility and respect, which excited the hopes of such as longed for the conclusion of these violent discords, did not terminate in the reconciliation that was expected. New incidents arose to blast the influence of these salutary measures, and the flame of dissension gained new vigour. Under the pontificate of Urban IV., however, the aspect of things changed for the better, and the negotiations for peace were renewed with such success, as promised a speedy conclusion of these unhappy divisions; for Michael Palæologus had no sooner driven the Latins out of Constantinople, then he sent ambassadors to Rome to declare his pacific intentions, that thus he might establish his disputed dominion, and gain over the Roman pontiff to his side. But during the course of these negotiations, Urban's death left matters unfinished, and suspended once more the hopes and expectations of the public. Under the pontificate of Gregory X., proposals of peace were again made by the same emperor, who, after much opposition from his own clergy, sent ambassadors to the council of Lyons in the year 1274; and these deputies, with the solemn consent of John Veccus, patriarch of Constantinople, and several Greek bishops, publicly agreed to the terms of accommodation proposed by the pontiff.** This re-union, however, was *Jo. Alb. Fabricius, Delect. Argumentorum et Scriptor. pro veritate Relig. Christian. p. 270. † Liber contra Judæos et Paganos. See Wadding, Annal. Minor. tom. ii. p. 279, 296; and Echard, Scriptor. Ordin. Prædicator. tom. i. p. (C3, 911.-Add to these Matth. Paris, Histor. Major, p. 386. § See Baluzii Miscellan. tom. vii. p. 370, 388, 393, 497.-Wadding, Annal. Minor. tom. iii. and iv. Wadding, tom. iv. p. 181, 201, 223, 269, 303. See Wadding, Annal. Minor. tom. iv. p. 343, 371. tom. v. p. 9, 29, 62.-Colonia, Hist. Liter. de la Ville de Lyon, tom. ii. p. 284. **Joseph (not Veccus) was patriarch of Constantinople, when this treaty was concluded. The for XIV. We pass over several controversies of a more private kind, and of inferior moment, which have nothing in their nature or circum stances to claim the attention of the curious; but we must not forget to observe that the grand dispute concerning the eucharist was still continued in this century, not only in France, but also in some other countries; for, though Innocent III. had, in the Lateran council of the year 1215, presumptuously placed transubstantiation among the avowed and regular doctrines of the Latin church, yet the authority of this decree was called in question by many, and several divines maintained the probability of the opinions that were opposed to that monstrous doctrine. Those indeed who, adopting the sentiments of Berenger, considered the bread and wine r no other light than as signs or symbols of the body and blood of Christ, did not venture either to defend or profess this opinion in a public manner; while many thought it sufficient to acknowledge what was termed a real presence, though they explained the manner of this presence quite otherwise than the doctrine of Innocent had defined it. Among these, John, surnamed Pungens Asinus, a subtle doctor of the university of Paris, acquired an eminent and distinguished name, and without incurring the censure of his superiors, substituted consubstantiation for transubstantiation toward the conclusion of this century. mer had bound himself by a solemn oath never to con sent to a reconciliation between the Greek and Latin churches; for which reason the emperor, when he sent his ambassadors to Lyons, proposed to Joseph the following alternative: that, if they succeeded in bringing about an accommodation, he should renounce his patriarchal dignity; but if they failed in their attempt, he was to remain patriarch, being ad vised, at the same time, to retire to a convent, unti the matter was decided. The ambassadors were suc cessful: Joseph was deposed, and Veccus elected in his place; when, and not before, the latter ratified the treaty in question by his solemn consent to the ignominious article of supremacy and pre-eminence which it confirmed to the Roman pontiff. *Leo Allatius, de perpetua Consensione Eccles Orient. et Occident. lib. i. c. xv. xvi. p. 727.-Fred. Spanheim de Perpet. Dissensione Græcor. et Latin. tom. ii. op. p. 188, &c. † Pet. Allix. Præf. ad F. Johannis Determinat, de Sacramento Altaris, published at London in 1686. The book of this celebrated doctor was published by the learned Allix above mentioned. Se Baluzii Vitæ Pontif. Avenion. tom. i. I 576.D'Acherii Spicileg. Veter. Scriptor. tom. iii. F. 58.~. Echardi Scriptors Dominic tom. i. p. 561 CHAPTER IV. Concerning the Rites and Ceremonies used in the ministered to sick or dying persons, with inany other ceremonies of a like nature, which are dishonourable to religion, and opprobrious to humanity. But that which gave the finishing touch to this heap of absurdities, and displayed superstition in its highest extravagance, was the institution of the celebrated annual Festitival of the Holy Sacrament, or, as it is sometimes called, of the Body of Christ; the origin of which was as follows: a certain devout woman, whose name was Juliana, and who lived at Liege, declared that she had received a revelation from heaven, intimating to her, that it was the will of God, that a peculiar festival should be annually observed in honour of the holy sacrament, or rather of the real presence of Christ's body in that sacred institution. Few gave attention or credit to this pretended vision, the circumstances of which were ex I. Ir would be endless to enumerate the additions that were made in this century to the external part of divine worship, in order to inase its pomp and render it more striking. These additions were produced in part by the public edicts of the Roman pontiffs, and partly by the private injunctions of the sacerdotal and monastic orders, who shared the veneration which was excited in the multitude by the splendour and magnificence of this religious spectacle. Instead of mentioning these additions, we shall only observe in general, that religion had now become a sort of a raree-show in the hands of the rulers of the church, who, to render its impressions more deep and last-tremely equivocal and absurd,* and which ing, thought proper to exhibit it in a striking would have come to nothing, had it not been manner to the external senses. For this pur- supported by Robert, bishop of Liege, who, in pose, at stated times, and especially upon the 1246, published an order for the celebration of principal festivals, the miraculous dispensations this festival throughout the province, notwithof the divine wisdom in favour of the church, standing the opposition which he knew would and the more remarkable events in the Chris- be made to a proposal founded only on an idle tian history, were represented under allegorical dream. After the death of Juliana, one of her figures and images, or rather in a kind of friends and companions, whose name was mimic show. But these scenic representations, Eve, adopted her cause with uncommon zeal, in which there was a motley mixture of mirth and had sufficient credit with Urban IV. to and gravity, these tragi-comical spectacles, engage him to publish, in 1264, a solemn edict, though they amused and affected in a certain by which the festival in question was imposed manner the gazing populace, were highly det- || upon all the Christian churches. This edict. rimental, instead of being useful to the cause however, did not produce its full effect, on acof religion; they degraded its dignity, and fur-count of the death of the pontiff, which hapnished abundant matter of laughter to its ene-pened soon after its publication; so that the mies. festival in question was not universally celebrated in the Latin churches before the pontificate of Clement V., who, in the council which he held at Vienne in Dauphine, in 1311, confirmed the edict of Urban, and thus, in spite of all opposition, established a festival, which contributed more to render the doctrine of transubstantiation agreeable to the people, than the decree of the Lateran council under Innocent III., or than all the exhortations of his lordly successors. II. It will not appear surprising that the bread, consecrated in the sacrament of the Lord's supper, became the object of religious worship; for this was the natural consequence of the monstrous doctrine of transubstantiation. But the effects of that impious and ridiculous doctrine did not end here; it produced a series of ceremonies and institutions, still used in the church of Rome, in honour of that deified bread, as they blasphemously call it. Hence arose those rich and splendid receptacles III. About the conclusion of this century, which were formed for the residence of God Boniface VIII. added, to the public rites and under this new shape, and the lamps and ceremonies of the church, the famous jubilee, other precious ornaments that were designed to which is still celebrated at Rome, at a stated beautify this habitation of the Deity; and period, with the utmost profusion of pomp and hence the custom that still prevails of carry-magnificence. In 1299, a rumour was propaing about this divine bread in solemn pomp gated among the inhabitants of that city, im through the public streets, when it is to be ad-porting that all such as should visit, within the *It is probable that this licentious custom of exhibiting mimic representations of religious objects derived its origin from the Mendicant friars. This blasphemous language, which Dr. Mosheim is obliged to use in representing the absurdities of the doctrine of transubstantiation, is nothing|| in comparison with the impious figures that were used by the abettors of that monstrous tenet, to accommodate it, in some measure, to the capacities of the multitude. We need not wonder, that the Pagans metamorphosed their Jupiter into a bull, a swan, and other such figures, when we see the rulers of the Christian church transforming the Son of God into a piece of bread; a transformation so vile, and (even were not vile) so useless, that it is inconceivable how it could enter into the head of any mortal, and equally so. how the bishops of Rome could confide so far in the credulity of the people as to risk their anthority by propagating such a doctrine. limits of the following year, the church of St. Peter, should obtain the remission of all their sins, and that this privilege was to be annexed to This fanatical woman declared, that as often as she addressed herself to God, or to the saints in prayer, she saw the full moon with a small defect or breach in it; and that, having long studied to find out the signification of this strange appearance, she was inwardly informed by the Spirit, that the moon signified the church, and that the defect or breach was the want of an annual festival in honour of the holy sacrament. † See Barthol. Fisen, Origo prima Festi Corporis Christi ex Viso Sanctæ Virgini Julianæ oblato, published at Liege in 1619.-Dallæus, de Cultus religiosi objecto, p. 287.-Acta Sanctor. April. tom. i. p. 437 903-And above all Benedic XIV. Pont. Max. de Festis Christi et Mariæ, lib. i. c. xiii. p. 360. tom x. op. |